On 02/06/2015 19:05, Joe Touch wrote:
On 6/2/2015 11:02 AM, Ted Lemon wrote:
On Jun 2, 2015, at 12:59 PM, Joe Touch <touch(_at_)isi(_dot_)edu> wrote:
Leaving out the have-nots - or those whose access is blocked by others
when content cannot be scanned - isn't moving forward.
That would certainly be a problem if the consensus were not to
provide both a secure and an, as you call it, "open" version of all IETF
documents.
The IETF is more than just the documents.
All IETF content should be accessible via non-secure means.
Joe
s/should/MUST/
Stewart